ML20148D463
| ML20148D463 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Comanche Peak  |
| Issue date: | 01/19/1988 |
| From: | Counsil W, Woodlan D TEXAS UTILITIES ELECTRIC CO. (TU ELECTRIC) |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION & RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (ARM) |
| References | |
| CP-87-30, TXX-88046, NUDOCS 8801250395 | |
| Download: ML20148D463 (2) | |
Text
W NEE Log # TXX-88046 Fi1e # 10110
_.__r
=
906.5 1UELECTRIC January 19, 1988 wnu-c. co. wi oman vu em,sar V. S. !!sciear Regulatory Commission Attn: Document Control Desk Washington, D. C.
20555
SUBJECT:
COMANCHE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC STATION (CPSES)
DOCKET NOS. 50-445 AND 50-446 ROLL-AWAY MISSILE SHIELOS (RAMS)
SDAR:
CP-87-30 (FINAL REPORT)
Gentlemen:
On July 1,1987, we verbally notified your Mr. H. S. Phillips of a deficiency involving errors in the seismic qualification report supplied by the vendor of the Roll-Away Missile Shields (RAMS).
A preliminary review of these errors indicated that the RAMS were overstressed for the designed seismic conditions detailed in the applicable specifications. Our last report, logged TXX-88024, was submitted on January 5,1988.
A preliminary analysis was initiated in April, 1987, to evaluate the effects of a proposed addition of HVAC equipment to the RAMS structu,e.
This preliminary analysis identified several members and weld joints which were overstressed, without installation of the additional equipment.
As-built shop welds on the RAMS were also observed by field walkdown to be up to 50'4 undersized, in addition, a significant number of welds specified on the design drawings were ohysically impossible to achieve based on tne dimensions of the structural members.
The RAMS are supported by the refueling crane rails on the 860' floor elevation.
An additional item identified in our evaluation was that the rails were not qualified for seismic and missile impact reaction Ic3ds from the RAMS.
An evaluation of the RAMS and the refueling crane rails determined that for the emergency and faulted conditions, the stresses exceeded code allowables.
A finite element analysis was subsequently performed which demonstrated that during these conditions the equipment would have continued to perform their safety function.
8801250395 890119 PDR ADOCK C5000445 g
PDR 9
400 North Olm 5 vert LB 81 (Wlas, Trus 1ROI i-
-1 4
TXX-88046 January 19, 1988 Page 2 of 2 We have completed our evaluatierr of this issue, and have conciuded that-none of the above deficiencies are reportable pursuant to 10CFR50.55(e).
Modifications are being performed, however, to reduce the stresses in the equipment (for the emergency and faulted conditions) to be within the code allowables. We are also correcting the design documentation to reflect the as-built design.
Supporting documentation is available at the CPSES site for your review.
Very truly yours, u). G. W W. G. Counsil k
By:
D. H. Woodlan Supervisor, Docket Licensing BSO/mlh c - Mr. R. D. Martin, Region IV Resident Inspectors, CPSES (3) a e
l i
i i
I 6
3 I
L
-.